I was thinking that the Beamng Devs could include the NVIDIA's Ray Tracing technologie in the game to make the mirrors and all the reflections work properly like if you agree
I believe the devs have more priorities than to add fancy reflections that would make the game run like poop. Adding better physics, making stuff more efficient and more user friendly and in general improve performance for your average Joe's computer. Also I don´t think RT is smth Beam really needs, but that´s only me.
I mean it would be cool to add it as a feature like a switch we can turn on and off for us RTX owners , and to be completely honest the reflections in Beamng aren't the best and as you said that's only me
Rtx is a joke, its nothing more than a selling point, the 16-series will get you the rtx performance without that feature that just a few games support and for a whole lot cheaper.
A 1660(ti) is not as fast as the RTX cards .. even the RTX 2060 is faster, that´s the problem. The 1660 series is like the Pascal's 1050Ti .. it´s a budget low end card, but it´s faster than a 1050ti.
You can see how gorgeous the game would look in my profile picture that was made with Blender and isn't in-game physics, but still it would be cool if the devs started working on the esthetic aspects of the game like they did in the last update with the maps improvements since the Physics and other stuff are already really good, it's really sucks to have a $600 Graphic card and not being able to use it's full capacity and all it's features.
I don't think you understand how unrealistic this is. I'm sure the devs would have to pay Nvidia to do this, too. Right now, there probably isn't a single PC out there that can handle both in-depth physics and extremely realistic graphics. Also, it's "technology", not "technologie".
I'm using 100% of my 1080ti.... So I'm sure you can use 100% of your rtx 2070 (just guessing thats what you have). You just can use ray tracing... Which to be honest shouldn't be a big deal...
True I wasn't seeing it that way both realistic graphics and physics would indeed even make a $10000 config lag, and sorry about the bad English I'm French
The big thing here is just that we have to look at this from the big perspective. RTX cards and real time ray tracing is basically the bleeding edge of this new technology and there is probably only about 100 to 200 people (perhaps more) in the entire community that have the hardware necessary to push real time ray tracing in a game right now (you apparently being one of them). This means that if the devs were to add this, the feature that would take a LOT of development time would end up only being able to be used by about 1% to 5% of the user base... and that's just not a great business strategy. Now as technology improves and more powerful computers that can push ray tracing start to become the norm, then and only then may the devs even consider it... because a much larger portion of the user base would be capable of actually using the feature rather than it just appearing like waisted time. We also have to look at this from a licencing standpoint. RTX "technology" is basically all controlled by Nvidia right now... which sucks because that means you have to pay out the nose to implement the technology... nevermind running it on anything. Plus I also feel like implementing it into just "any old engine" would probably bring any normal development team to their knees... Not sure on that one but it sure doesn't seem like it would be very simple. Then there is the fact that before they even start working on this, they have to upgrade all their development systems to be able to push real time ray tracing. Lets just say that they need to upgrade 20 computers (I feel like it would be more but I will stick with that) with all new RTX cards... even if it was just 2060's, that's an investment of $7,000 right there in computer upgrades alone... of just graphics cards. So yeah... maybe in 5 years time this might be a necessary transition... perhaps it would be a good idea for them to work on things in the background to eventually optimize the transition... but right now... real time ray tracing is just unreasonable.
In 5 years or more raytracing would be supported for most things because average gaming hardware would have that performance.
You don't need ray tracing for proper reflections. I agree BeamNG needs better mirrors, they are very low-res even at the highest setting. But that has nothing to do with ray tracing.
This is an impossible task. Beamng uses SoftBody physics, which is far, far more straining on performance. Couple this with raytracing and the game would not be able to be run that well. Overall, it’s a feature that is seriously not needed.
We are talking about an essentially 22 year old game engine that is open sourced and supported by a devoted fan base, and a couple of indie developers or so. Real time ray tracing?....lmao.
While i agree that it is not easy, physics are entirely cpu driven, while rtx raytracing is entirely gpu bound so for powerful pcs that wouldnt matter --- Post updated --- Remember quake rtx? Old games are good for raytracing because of low poly count and texture size, the fact that it is open sauce is helpful, because anyone can work on it, quake rtx was developed by a student! --- Post updated --- Yes it has, raytracing wouldn't be perfect for mirrors, but it would represent reflections as they are irl, beam i believe uses render to texture reflections, which look fairly good but are inaccurate, because they use only one point of reference for all reflections
